3 ms·

This is categorically wrong. The engines being too low will kill everyone on the plane should the special control mechanism not exist. The control mechanism ex

This is categorically wrong. The engines being too low will kill everyone on the plane should the special control mechanism not exist. The control mechanism existed to cover up a physical flaw then proceeded to be the cause of crashes itself. If a control mechanism can easily be fixed... What was the exact fix? Literally tell me.

Dylan16807 6y ago
> The engines being too low will kill everyone on the plane should the special control mechanism not exist. It makes the control curve slightly different, don't be so dramatic. > If a control mechanism can easily be fixed... What was the exact fix? Literally tell me. I'm not psychic, I can't tell you how they fixed it, but you can find a ton of people talking about how redundant sensors would have avoided the same issue. You could also have it be much more obvious when it's adjusting trim, because if the pilots were aware of what was happening they wouldn't have crashed either. from your other comment> Saying the control mechanism crashed the plane and just fixing that is like saying you didn't put enough duct tape over the real problem. Tape, and the equivalent of tape, is a valid solution to many problems if you have an expert analyze it.
- Geminidog 6y ago
  >It makes the control curve slightly different, don't be so dramatic. I'm not being drastic, the plane has an unconventional control system built to hide a physical flaw that is never an actual physical property on planes designed from the ground up. The plane will literally stall: https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/economics/boeing-737-max-major-design-flaws-not-a-software-failure https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/economics/boeing-737-max-... It's well known boeing used a hack to avoid costs of redesign. >Tape, and the equivalent of tape, is a valid solution to many problems if you have an expert analyze it. The experts who killed 300 people analyzed the mcas and also built it. No one will get on a plane covered in duck tape no matter how many experts analyzed it. >I'm not psychic, I can't tell you how they fixed it, Makes sense that you're not psychic. Likely you went to google at some point and tried to find out what that fix was and likely you found nothing. That's a red flag, a huge one. Being psychic is the only possible way you'll know what the engineers did to duct tape the whole design. At the very least this is something any wise man should know about before getting onto that plane.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    The plane will stall unless you push the stick differently or adjust the trim. It's something you can compensate for. MCAS doesn't even adjust the trim very fast! It's a hack but that's mainly to avoid retraining, not because the design is inherently all that dangerous. > The experts who killed 300 people analyzed the mcas and also built it. It could be fair to avoid all planes coming from those experts. But if you don't trust them to fix a single flaw, why in god's name do you trust them to design an entirely new plane? This is not a reason to push for a redesign. > No one will get on a plane covered in duck tape no matter how many experts analyzed it. Ever heard of speed tape? Most people will either get on the plane when it's fixed, or they will never get on the plane. They're not going to care about the exact details. > Likely you went to google at some point and tried to find out what that fix was and likely you found nothing. That's a red flag, a huge one. Sure. Red flag. But a flag is far from conclusive. > At the very least this is something any wise man should know about before getting onto that plane. I'm wise enough to not play armchair plane engineer when my life is on the line. If I don't trust the process, then I'll wait for a certain number of flight hours instead. I'm not going to depend on my own ability to analyze plane design.
    - Geminidog 6y ago
      >It could be fair to avoid all planes coming from those experts. But if you don't trust them to fix a single flaw, why in god's name do you trust them to design an entirely new plane? This is not a reason to push for a redesign. Well it's not just experts. There's a bunch of factors surrounding this design decision. Business pressure. I would say the experts are aware of the flaw and went with it because of pressure. I would ask that the experts design the plane AS if they weren't under that same kind of pressure. >Ever heard of speed tape? Duct tape was a metaphor for a patch work fix that is unsound. Think: speed tape used to tape an entire tail onto a plane. >Most people will either get on the plane when it's fixed, or they will never get on the plane. They're not going to care about the exact details. Hard to say. I think for myself I can (possibly) be convinced to get back onto that plane if I knew more details and the details sounded pretty good to me. >I'm wise enough to not play armchair plane engineer when my life is on the line. If I don't trust the process, then I'll wait for a certain number of flight hours instead. I'm not going to depend on my own ability to analyze plane design. Agreed. Data trumps my own BS judgement. Still even with my garbage aerospace engineering knowledge I'm sure I can tell the difference in safety between an entire air frame redesign versus just software patches and if the latter was all they did, likely I'm never getting on that plane unless the data says otherwise.

Dylan16807 6y ago

> The engines being too low will kill everyone on the plane should the special control mechanism not exist. It makes the control curve slightly different, don't be so dramatic. > If a control mechanism can easily be fixed... What was the exact fix? Literally tell me. I'm not psychic, I can't tell you how they fixed it, but you can find a ton of people talking about how redundant sensors would have avoided the same issue. You could also have it be much more obvious when it's adjusting trim, because if the pilots were aware of what was happening they wouldn't have crashed either. from your other comment> Saying the control mechanism crashed the plane and just fixing that is like saying you didn't put enough duct tape over the real problem. Tape, and the equivalent of tape, is a valid solution to many problems if you have an expert analyze it.

Geminidog 6y ago
>It makes the control curve slightly different, don't be so dramatic. I'm not being drastic, the plane has an unconventional control system built to hide a physical flaw that is never an actual physical property on planes designed from the ground up. The plane will literally stall: https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/economics/boeing-737-max-major-design-flaws-not-a-software-failure https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/economics/boeing-737-max-... It's well known boeing used a hack to avoid costs of redesign. >Tape, and the equivalent of tape, is a valid solution to many problems if you have an expert analyze it. The experts who killed 300 people analyzed the mcas and also built it. No one will get on a plane covered in duck tape no matter how many experts analyzed it. >I'm not psychic, I can't tell you how they fixed it, Makes sense that you're not psychic. Likely you went to google at some point and tried to find out what that fix was and likely you found nothing. That's a red flag, a huge one. Being psychic is the only possible way you'll know what the engineers did to duct tape the whole design. At the very least this is something any wise man should know about before getting onto that plane.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  The plane will stall unless you push the stick differently or adjust the trim. It's something you can compensate for. MCAS doesn't even adjust the trim very fast! It's a hack but that's mainly to avoid retraining, not because the design is inherently all that dangerous. > The experts who killed 300 people analyzed the mcas and also built it. It could be fair to avoid all planes coming from those experts. But if you don't trust them to fix a single flaw, why in god's name do you trust them to design an entirely new plane? This is not a reason to push for a redesign. > No one will get on a plane covered in duck tape no matter how many experts analyzed it. Ever heard of speed tape? Most people will either get on the plane when it's fixed, or they will never get on the plane. They're not going to care about the exact details. > Likely you went to google at some point and tried to find out what that fix was and likely you found nothing. That's a red flag, a huge one. Sure. Red flag. But a flag is far from conclusive. > At the very least this is something any wise man should know about before getting onto that plane. I'm wise enough to not play armchair plane engineer when my life is on the line. If I don't trust the process, then I'll wait for a certain number of flight hours instead. I'm not going to depend on my own ability to analyze plane design.
  - Geminidog 6y ago
    >It could be fair to avoid all planes coming from those experts. But if you don't trust them to fix a single flaw, why in god's name do you trust them to design an entirely new plane? This is not a reason to push for a redesign. Well it's not just experts. There's a bunch of factors surrounding this design decision. Business pressure. I would say the experts are aware of the flaw and went with it because of pressure. I would ask that the experts design the plane AS if they weren't under that same kind of pressure. >Ever heard of speed tape? Duct tape was a metaphor for a patch work fix that is unsound. Think: speed tape used to tape an entire tail onto a plane. >Most people will either get on the plane when it's fixed, or they will never get on the plane. They're not going to care about the exact details. Hard to say. I think for myself I can (possibly) be convinced to get back onto that plane if I knew more details and the details sounded pretty good to me. >I'm wise enough to not play armchair plane engineer when my life is on the line. If I don't trust the process, then I'll wait for a certain number of flight hours instead. I'm not going to depend on my own ability to analyze plane design. Agreed. Data trumps my own BS judgement. Still even with my garbage aerospace engineering knowledge I'm sure I can tell the difference in safety between an entire air frame redesign versus just software patches and if the latter was all they did, likely I'm never getting on that plane unless the data says otherwise.